[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dpkg versioned provides


On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 07:06:52 +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> We now want to test whether dose3 supports them correctly. We think that it
> *should* not be hard to do so because dose3 internally uses a cudf
> representation of Debian dependencies and cudf already understands versioned
> provides.
> Having a look at the test cases in the dpkg-tests git doesn't show any
> surprises with respect to how they should be interpreted but I think I remember
> Guillem saying that there was some unintuitive trickery to be resolved for this
> feature?

Hmm, not sure exactly what comment you are referring to. It could have
been related to the missing support in the perl side of the code (fixed in
commit 5cc36d8e80)?

I think the functional tests should be pretty comprehensive.

> For example when reading dpkg commit 5bb02fe I saw a comment which explains
> how versioned or unversioned dependencies should or should not be satisfied
> by versioned or unversioned provides (in lib/dpkg/depcon.c for function
> pkg_virtual_deppossi_satisfied)
> But I do not see these cases being tested for.

You mean for Provides on relations different to equal versions?

> Should I just use this comment to create some test cases for dose3 or are there
> some existing ones of dpkg that I'm missing?

Depends on the above question I guess? :)

> I suppose the comment is still an accurate description how it should work?

Both the commit message and the one in the code should reflect the
current behavior, yes.


Reply to: